Thanks for the post! I was surprised to see how weak the academically-published evidence is regarding shrimp stunning effectiveness, and agree that it would be valuable on current margins for effective animal advocates to invest more in research.
For what it’s worth, I read the Tesco-Hilton case study more optimistically than you do. You quote it as:
The results are a bit vaguely presented, but with at least one machine setting “a significant proportion” of shrimp did not “show signs of recovery” within 10 minutes.
But the full quote is
A significant proportion of prawns were in irrecoverable stun (stun-kill) on exit of the stunner as evidenced by transfer back to a controlled aqueous environment where none showed signs of recoverywithin the monitoring period (10 minutes plus handling time of 32 seconds)
(emphasis mine). That’s not to say that we should rely on a single vague industry report when the academic evidence is conflicting, but I think the report does provide some evidence.
Thanks for the post! I was surprised to see how weak the academically-published evidence is regarding shrimp stunning effectiveness, and agree that it would be valuable on current margins for effective animal advocates to invest more in research.
For what it’s worth, I read the Tesco-Hilton case study more optimistically than you do. You quote it as:
But the full quote is
(emphasis mine). That’s not to say that we should rely on a single vague industry report when the academic evidence is conflicting, but I think the report does provide some evidence.